|
Radbot posted:Everyone keeps pointing to a lack of housing as the issue, and we live in a free-ish market economy, and yet - there is no new affordable housing being built. It's almost like that's not the whole issue.
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 7, 2024 15:54 |
|
|
Cicero posted:lol if you think housing is a free market in desirable metros Yeah Seattle is chock full of dumbass height restrictions. One of my friends lives in a 20 story tower in the U district that was built prior to the restrictions, which are currently set at six stories. Any time someone tries to raise the restrictions the existing tower residents throw a fit about their view. If you want to build in San Francisco you risk losing years of planning and millions of dollars to capricious local community boards that can veto your project.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 03:26
|
|
|
The fact that both conservatives and progressives aren't trying to dismantle their local zoning ordinances is the most   thing I encounter as an urban planner.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
A lot of progressives REALLY hate developers. They'd rather deny the developers as much profit as humanly possible than focus on helping the poor and middle class with their rents. And both sides like to yammer on about neighborhood 'character', aka "let's freeze this neighborhood in amber because I hate change", or sometimes "b-b-but my Cicero fucked around with this message at 06:01 on Jun 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 05:59
|
|
|
pig slut lisa posted:The fact that both conservatives and progressives aren't trying to dismantle their local zoning ordinances is the most may be for the best, most zoning ordinances are arcane bullshit magic based on decades of whimsy codified into law
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 06:14
|
|
|
turns out everyone likes being the very last person to move into a neighborhood and the next family behind them in line will ruin it all if they move there kind of like how people get pissed at everyone else when they're sitting in a traffic jam
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 06:15
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:kind of like how people get pissed at everyone else when they're sitting in a traffic jam
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 06:46
|
|
|
I, too, would like to live in the young adult Disneyland that is Manhattan, SF, Seattle, DC, Boston...
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 08:08
|
|
|
mrbradlymrmartin posted:because rentiers are more important than workers because hey, theyre parasites *with money* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ubckx7X2Nd4
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 09:28
|
|
|
pig slut lisa posted:The fact that both conservatives and progressives aren't trying to dismantle their local zoning ordinances is the most It's loving ridiculous, I can understand why the right is prepared to drop their principles in favour of shortsighted selfishness, but when so called progressives oppose development for the sake of the "village character" of a suburb or out of unthinking opposition to "developers" it's beyond belief.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 10:44
|
|
|
Cicero posted:A lot of progressives REALLY hate developers. They'd rather deny the developers as much profit as humanly possible than focus on helping the poor and middle class with their rents. There's nothing homeowners like more than parking
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 10:44
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:It's loving ridiculous, I can understand why the right is prepared to drop their principles in favour of shortsighted selfishness, but when so called progressives oppose development for the sake of the "village character" of a suburb or out of unthinking opposition to "developers" it's beyond belief. "In every political community there are varying shades of political opinion. One of the shadiest of these is the liberals. An outspoken group on many subjects. Ten degrees to the left of center in good times. Ten degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally."
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 10:59
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:"In every political community there are varying shades of political opinion. One of the shadiest of these is the liberals. An outspoken group on many subjects. Ten degrees to the left of center in good times. Ten degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally." There'd be a point to this if the honest to god leftists were engaging in 'direct action' to loosen zoning restrictions and raise height limits instead of throwing rocks at luxury buses full of nerds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 11:09
|
|
|
What does that have to do with my comment, I haven't thrown rocks at anyone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 11:15
|
|
|
Property value due to location is exponential and has resulted in the land of central park being worth more than the GDP of Japan.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 11:18
|
|
|
All the savings people get by going car free in major cities just goes straight into rent
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Also if you brought back sundown laws then you'd see rents be a lot lower? Makes u think
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 13:59
|
|
|
The solution would be public transportation and affordable public housing, but thats not what you are going to get in the states, so you end up with luxury condos with no parking and maybe infrequent bus service. Rents are going to be sky high, transportation is going to be a nightmare but there will be a craft kombucha place around the corner.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
Touchdown Boy posted:Instead of complaining just buy a house and rent it to someone for far more than it costs in mortgage payments, then buy a few more and repeat. There, problem solved (for you). Few things infuriate me more than the radio commercials for house flippers. Some huckster comes on yelling about how his "System" is perfect for (Insert city region here), and how you can "Make money flipping houses in your spare time using 'other people's money!'. We're looking for a few 'Motivated Individuals' to join our 'Investment Team'. Blahblabblah INCOME PROPERTIES!" All I can imagine is some douche on way too many amphetamines with a headset yelling at a conference room of 13-20 people about his new book. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The solution would be public transportation and affordable public housing, but thats not what you are going to get in the states, so you end up with luxury condos with no parking and maybe infrequent bus service. Rents are going to be sky high, transportation is going to be a nightmare but there will be a craft kombucha place around the corner. Better than a single luxury townhouse and 5 parking spaces.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:Better than a single luxury townhouse and 5 parking spaces. Both don't really work (although a luxury townhouse does work less admittedly) and in the end neither one provides affordable housing. Nevertheless density (relatively higher) without infrastructure ends up like much of central LA. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Jun 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Both don't really work (although a luxury townhouse does work less admittedly) and in the end neither one provides affordable housing. Nevertheless density (relatively higher) without infrastructure ends up like much of central LA. LA is one of the most dysfunctional "cities" on the planet, I don't think their problem is that they allowed too much density in the CBD. Rather it has sprawling low density (for the context) suburbs which make effective transit more expensive than normal in a place where support for transit is already low. Combined with chronic inequality, institutionalised racism, and incredible levels of nimbyism means it isn't going to get better any time soon. However there's more too it than that, when there is built up demand for housing allowing it to be built is pretty close to printing money, and increases demand for other services in the area. The benefit from this (at least initially) disproportionally goes to low income workers though. Getting high income apartments through the planning process is much easier because no one wants poor people moving in next door. This doesn't mean we shouldn't support it though, after all whoever is moving into those apartments has presumably moved out from somewhere else, and building 30 apartments is going to moderate prices more than building none. distortion park fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Jun 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:LA is one of the most dysfunctional "cities" on the planet, I don't think their problem is that they allowed too much density in the CBD. Rather it has sprawling low density (for the context) suburbs which make effective transit more expensive than normal in a place where support for transit is already low. Combined with chronic inequality, institutionalised racism, and incredible levels of nimbyism means it isn't going to get better any time soon. The issue is that those people buying those luxury apartments are most likely coming from suburbs (in or outside the metro area) which is opening up less accessible housing options elsewhere and in the case of LA, if you live further from the city center there aren't usually decent options for transportation of any type. LA is also a mess because while destiny has happened, it has been largely unplanned without adequate infrastructure. Century City is a perfect example of this (one of dozens though) which is a bunch of medium sized skyscrapers connected by city streets with no rail or even real freeway connections. Downtown LA itself is also a disaster even if it actually access to it (it doesn't help the freeway system centralizes in a loop around it). Density in Santa Monica has exploded but there isn't the infrastructure to handle it either. The same could be said of most of the Westside (there is a reason "the 405" is a reference everyone understands) especially around UCLA it is god awful. LA isn't as low density as people think, it just has the infrastructure of a smaller city from the late 1950s at best. It is unclear how removing what LA calls zoning would actually help this situation. So you can expand density (and it needs to happen one way or another), but unless you actually invest in the billions of infrastructure you need it is going to end up like LA.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The issue is that those people buying those luxury apartments are most likely coming from suburbs (in or outside the metro area) which is opening up less accessible housing options elsewhere and in the case of LA, if you live further from the city center there aren't usually decent options for transportation of any type. LA has had plenty of planning, it's just that it consisted solely of highways and neighbourhood building restrictions. "Planned" cities in the sense which I think you mean are generally pretty poo poo, see Brasilia or Australia's capital who's name I can't remember
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
EB Nulshit posted:Where is housing not affordable? NYC? Some parts of California? The examples that come to my mind involve legal restrictions on supply. It's almost like that's the entire issue Denver, Colorado and the surrounding areas, for one. Please cite your sources on "legal restrictions on supply". Amazing how developers just reeeealllly want to build small, affordable homes but the big evil government wants to load down everyone with a McMansion or scraped duplex. Radbot fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Jun 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:LA is also a mess because while destiny has happened, it has been largely unplanned without adequate infrastructure. LA was planned. it was just planned in a time and place that emphasized automobile transit above everything else as the way to bring affordable, clean housing and nice orderly prosperous metros to turns out that doesn't work. whoops!
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:LA has had plenty of planning, it's just that it consisted solely of highways and neighbourhood building restrictions. "Planned" cities in the sense which I think you mean are generally pretty poo poo, see Brasilia or Australia's capital who's name I can't remember This comment is spot on. Even Houston, which people love to point to as an unplanned city, has plenty of development controls, overbuilt road standards, and plenty of direct subsidization of low density single use development.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Radbot posted:Denver, Colorado and the surrounding areas, for one. Please cite your sources on "legal restrictions on supply". LMAO have you ever looked at the zoning maps and codes for Denver and its suburbs? I'm guessing not, or you'd know exactly what legal restrictions on supply exist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:LA has had plenty of planning, it's just that it consisted solely of highways and neighbourhood building restrictions. "Planned" cities in the sense which I think you mean are generally pretty poo poo, see Brasilia or Australia's capital who's name I can't remember If you want that definition then extremely poorly planned with no time horizon longer than 20 years. With that argument nearly every city in the US is planned but in the case of many of them it was so poorly done and funded so poorly that the planning that it was ultimately laughable in retrospect. Houston is not a city I think of that is "over planned" even if solely invested into roads and some time of public pressure exists. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Jun 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:nearly every city in the US is planned but in the case of many of them it is done so poorly and funded so poorly that the planning that was ultimately laughable in retrospect. so are you like just discovering urban planning or what next you'll come to the shocking realization that you can't build your way out of congestion
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
20th century urban planning i.e. most active attempts to do urban planning are utterly ridiculous and prone to failure, the only time it works is when you just try to preserve and keep doing what people were sort of naturally doing before urban planning became a Thing that civil service bureaucracies felt responsible for or you just turn the whole thing over to Autocrats like Hausmann or Bob Moses
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
This Jacket Is Me posted:I, too, would like to live in the young adult Disneyland that is Manhattan, SF, Seattle, DC, Boston... DC is like Disneyland in that there are lines for everything, everything is at an exorbitant price, and when you finally leave you'll wonder why you bothered coming in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:so are you like just discovering urban planning or what That was my argument in the first place, but moreover proper urban planning requires significant capital investment that has been deferred for years if not decades. Popular Thug Drink posted:20th century urban planning i.e. most active attempts to do urban planning are utterly ridiculous and prone to failure, the only time it works is when you just try to preserve and keep doing what people were sort of naturally doing before urban planning became a Thing that civil service bureaucracies felt responsible for Somehow much of Europe was still able to figure it out, and it is certainly a better idea than "let the free market roam." You want high density without meddling bureaucrats and public investment, good luck. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Jun 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:nearly every city in the US is planned but in the case of many of them it was so poorly done and funded so poorly that the planning that it was ultimately laughable in retrospect. Ding ding ding we have a winner
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
If your rent is too much, move it is not that hard of a concept. I'm sure apartments are plenty cheap out in north dakota
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:That was my argument in the first place, but moreover proper urban planning requires significant capital investment that has been deferred for years if not decades. My department does not need more funding to roll back the zoning rules that make affordable sustainable and small scale development difficult/impossible to build, depending on the neighborhood. We just need political will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
pig slut lisa posted:Ding ding ding we have a winner More or less my example of LA holds of exactly what not to do. pig slut lisa posted:My department does not need more funding to roll back the zoning rules that make affordable sustainable and small scale development difficult/impossible to build, depending on the neighborhood. We just need political will. Exactly how is this going to be accomplished? Just build bigger without oversight and the investment in infrastructure that needed to happen decades ago? Los Angeles is quite obviously getting more dense, but while it hasn't made housing more affordable it has made it even less of a functional city that it was previously. How is just accelerating construction going to fix this issue? If you want to say we should maximize density in a sensible way with oversight and investment, I would agree with you but just rezoning it isn't going to do it. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Jun 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Somehow much of Europe was still able to figure it out, and it is certainly a better idea than "let the free market roam." You want high density without meddling bureaucrats and public investment, good luck. much of europe has much stronger bureaucratic control allowing them to do regional level plans which are extremely rare in the us i would also argue most european cities/metropoles had the luxury of the correct choice being to do very little but keep up with housing and infrastructure. america tried to do big plans that turned sour and now we have a dumb mess on our hands
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Exactly how is this going to be accomplished? Just build bigger without oversight and the investment in infrastructure that needed to happen decades ago? Los Angeles is quite obviously getting more dense, but while it hasn't made housing more affordable it has made it even less of a functional city that it was previously. How is just accelerating construction going to fix this issue? in a lot of places in the us you have bugfucked setback requirements, occupancy limits, minimum parking requirements, etc. that artificially limit density. permitting developers to get past these weird restrictions and start building like rowhomes with one space per would be a good start
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 7, 2024 15:54 |
|
|
oh yeah not to mention often in the states that planning is local but control of planning resources is voted on the regional/state level so you've always got pants making GBS threads suburbanites voting down penny tax increases for infrastructure because they don't want criminals riding commuter rail to do crimes or whatever the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2015 18:40
|
|